|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Dec 5, 2023 20:59:48 GMT
So what? So am I.
|
|
|
|
Post by OfUnknownOrigins on Dec 5, 2023 21:30:49 GMT
No, he’s still a white Englishman but someone thought it would be creative and daring to cast a mixed race actor in the role. I don’t really mind but hopefully they’ll also cast white actors to play non-white historical characters. Kinda had that all through TV and Cinema history, although oddly those who throw hissy fits now never minded Charlton Heston as a Native American and the like. Why do people bring up idiotic casting choices from 50 years ago to say it’s okay to make idiotic casting choices today? When casting directors do this it takes me right out of a show or movie. I keep going, “Wait a sec, that doesn’t make sense.” I know in a silly, overrated show like Dr Who it shouldn’t matter, but it’s been a pattern of annoyance in casting since the BLM riots. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Dec 5, 2023 21:38:20 GMT
No, he’s still a white Englishman but someone thought it would be creative and daring to cast a mixed race actor in the role. I don’t really mind but hopefully they’ll also cast white actors to play non-white historical characters. Kinda had that all through TV and Cinema history, although oddly those who throw hissy fits now never minded Charlton Heston as a Native American and the like. That's completely missing the point. A film studio's goal is to make a profit so they want a big name - and someone who is contracted to them. How many native Americans were stars and contracted to studios back then? Zero, I'll bet. So they had no choice back then. But the same cannot be said now - there is plenty of choice so the decision now is based solely on race. That in itself is racist. |
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 5, 2023 22:38:03 GMT
Kinda had that all through TV and Cinema history, although oddly those who throw hissy fits now never minded Charlton Heston as a Native American and the like. Why do people bring up idiotic casting choices from 50 years ago to say it’s okay to make idiotic casting choices today? When casting directors do this it takes me right out of a show or movie. I keep going, “Wait a sec, that doesn’t make sense.” I know in a silly, overrated show like Dr Who it shouldn’t matter, but it’s been a pattern of annoyance in casting since the BLM riots. DOCTOR WHO started off with the brief to be entertaining and educational. It's early stories alternated between science fiction for the science and historical for history, which is why the first two Human companions were a science teacher and a history teacher. Therefore, one could argue that accuracy - where possible - was reasonably important. Of course, the accuracy was probably only as good as the writer's personal knowledge on the subject. Also, in early 1960s Britain, it may not always have been possible to get ethnically-correct actors to fill all the roles... and it may also simply not have been seen as important back then. Of course now, neither alternative should be an issue. 8-| |
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Dec 6, 2023 9:34:19 GMT
Kinda had that all through TV and Cinema history, although oddly those who throw hissy fits now never minded Charlton Heston as a Native American and the like. Why do people bring up idiotic casting choices from 50 years ago to say it’s okay to make idiotic casting choices today? When casting directors do this it takes me right out of a show or movie. I keep going, “Wait a sec, that doesn’t make sense.” I know in a silly, overrated show like Dr Who it shouldn’t matter, but it’s been a pattern of annoyance in casting since the BLM riots. I am not, I don't think it is right to portray historical figures as different ethnicities as it throws the piece off, my point was purely how those who most complain about it are those who have no problem when it was done the other way. It is far more acceptable in theatre productions of course where audiences seem to be less bothered maybe about experimental works. Sex change has always been common too. Maxine Peake was superb as Hamlet for example. |
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Dec 6, 2023 9:36:58 GMT
Kinda had that all through TV and Cinema history, although oddly those who throw hissy fits now never minded Charlton Heston as a Native American and the like. That's completely missing the point. A film studio's goal is to make a profit so they want a big name - and someone who is contracted to them. How many native Americans were stars and contracted to studios back then? Zero, I'll bet. So they had no choice back then. But the same cannot be said now - there is plenty of choice so the decision now is based solely on race. That in itself is racist. If it is now done purely on race as you say then either the studio is still working to make money and believe the casting choice will make them a profit or they are deliberately trying to lose money. Which is more likely with billion dollar corporations? |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Dec 6, 2023 11:36:31 GMT
That's completely missing the point. A film studio's goal is to make a profit so they want a big name - and someone who is contracted to them. How many native Americans were stars and contracted to studios back then? Zero, I'll bet. So they had no choice back then. But the same cannot be said now - there is plenty of choice so the decision now is based solely on race. That in itself is racist. If it is now done purely on race as you say then either the studio is still working to make money and believe the casting choice will make them a profit or they are deliberately trying to lose money. Which is more likely with billion dollar corporations? I don't think they are deliberately trying to lose money. I just think they lost their way and underestimated how much some films would lose. BBC is different - it's a nest of media luvvies without a profit focus. |
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Dec 6, 2023 16:41:15 GMT
If it is now done purely on race as you say then either the studio is still working to make money and believe the casting choice will make them a profit or they are deliberately trying to lose money. Which is more likely with billion dollar corporations? I don't think they are deliberately trying to lose money. I just think they lost their way and underestimated how much some films would lose. BBC is different - it's a nest of media luvvies without a profit focus. Actually with the BBC it's more a diversity figure they have to meet in the terms of their funding from Government which affects all commissioning decisions. They have to be regional productions also which is why the Beeb moved to Salford. The Beeb as a Londoncentric organisation of luvvies is long past. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Dec 6, 2023 16:47:26 GMT
I don't think they are deliberately trying to lose money. I just think they lost their way and underestimated how much some films would lose. BBC is different - it's a nest of media luvvies without a profit focus. Actually with the BBC it's more a diversity figure they have to meet in the terms of their funding from Government which affects all commissioning decisions. They have to be regional productions also which is why the Beeb moved to Salford. The Beeb as a Londoncentric organisation of luvvies is long past. Actually it is still full of luvvies and the notion that such people only exist in London is long past. |
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Dec 6, 2023 17:32:15 GMT
Actually with the BBC it's more a diversity figure they have to meet in the terms of their funding from Government which affects all commissioning decisions. They have to be regional productions also which is why the Beeb moved to Salford. The Beeb as a Londoncentric organisation of luvvies is long past. Actually it is still full of luvvies and the notion that such people only exist in London is long past. What's a "luvvie"?
|
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Dec 6, 2023 20:17:17 GMT
Actually with the BBC it's more a diversity figure they have to meet in the terms of their funding from Government which affects all commissioning decisions. They have to be regional productions also which is why the Beeb moved to Salford. The Beeb as a Londoncentric organisation of luvvies is long past. Actually it is still full of luvvies and the notion that such people only exist in London is long past. Okay. |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Dec 6, 2023 20:54:46 GMT
Why do people bring up idiotic casting choices from 50 years ago to say it’s okay to make idiotic casting choices today? When casting directors do this it takes me right out of a show or movie. I keep going, “Wait a sec, that doesn’t make sense.” I know in a silly, overrated show like Dr Who it shouldn’t matter, but it’s been a pattern of annoyance in casting since the BLM riots. I am not, I don't think it is right to portray historical figures as different ethnicities as it throws the piece off, my point was purely how those who most complain about it are those who have no problem when it was done the other way. It is far more acceptable in theatre productions of course where audiences seem to be less bothered maybe about experimental works. Sex change has always been common too. Maxine Peake was superb as Hamlet for example. Most of us complaining were not adults in 1956.....Or even born. There were reasons it was done 60 years ago, practical, financial and racist ones. In Current Year it is done for ideological reasons. The actual reason he is Asian is because of the BBC's diversity policies. The Doctor, Donna and their doubles are all white, so they need a non white actor in a prominent role to meets their criteria. But rather than visit a non white historical character, they race swap a white bloke to further the "Always here" lie. Two birds, one stone. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2023 21:00:21 GMT
Actually it is still full of luvvies and the notion that such people only exist in London is long past. What's a "luvvie"?
Luvvie was a nickname given to those who work in the theatre and has since been allocated to those with artistic pretensions in the TV and film industries. An actor once said he called theatre people “luvvie” if he couldn’t remember their names and didn’t want to appear rude. |
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Dec 6, 2023 21:18:16 GMT
No, he’s still a white Englishman but someone thought it would be creative and daring to cast a mixed race actor in the role. I don’t really mind but hopefully they’ll also cast white actors to play non-white historical characters. That will be fantastic. I want to see Joaquin Phoenix as Martin Luther King. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Dec 7, 2023 12:57:23 GMT
Actually it is still full of luvvies and the notion that such people only exist in London is long past. What's a "luvvie"?
A weak or effeminate man, usually working in the arts or media, flounces about a bit, calls everyone 'love'. |
|
